Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Sleestak reviews: The Brave and the Bold #2

What I appreciated about DC's 2007 revival of the classic team-up title is that in The Brave and the Bold #2 the team of Mark Waid, George Perez and the rest took one of the most annoying story concepts in the Luck Lords, from arguably the worst Silver Age tale ever of the Legion of Super-Heroes and made it pretty enjoyable and readable.



  1. Pshaw. This is nowhere near the worst Legion story ever published. That dubious honor should go to the J. M. DeMatteis/Steve Ditko "epic" featuring the incredible Dr. Mayavale. Don't let the George Perez cover fool you.

  2. Don't confuse a throw away filler story with bad art with a tale that was part of the mainstream LSH back story that had far-reaching ramifications for the gang. The Luck Lords story was reprinted many times and each time I saw it I hated it more.

    Also, your example of LSH #268 isn't from the Silver Age, being October 1980. But yeah, that issue is pretty heinous.

  3. Ah, my apologies. I didn't see the Silver Age qualifier.

    Hmmm.... maybe the one where the Legionnaires have a contest to take out the Wanderers in order to see who's the mightiest of all? The one where Superboy has to quit because of the 30th century tax laws which would impose "financial ruin" on the Legion (despite financier R. J. Brande) if they had more than 25 members? The Legion of Super-Pets has an initiation contest for Proty II that also provides the election for Legion leader?

  4. You didn't see the qualifier because I've tweaked the entry a few times.

    And you are quibbling over goofy yet earnest Silver Age stories vs. BAD BAD BAD stories.

    Don't diss the Super-Pets.

  5. I forgot about dr. Mayavale. Hey Doc, Rip Taylor called, he wants his haircut back.

  6. I dig the Vegas World motif.

    It was a busy story, but I liked it.



Moderation enabled only because of trolling, racist, homophobic hate-mongers.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.